Primary health care research & development
-
Prim Health Care Res Dev · Jan 2017
Co-production as an approach to developing stakeholder partnerships to reduce mental health inequalities: an evaluation of a pilot service.
Aim This study aimed to evaluate a pilot cross-sector initiative - bringing together public health, a community group, primary mental health teams and patients - in using co-production approaches to deliver a mental health service to meet the needs of the black and minority ethnic communities.
-
Prim Health Care Res Dev · Sep 2016
Evaluation of a faecal calprotectin care pathway for use in primary care.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence have recommended faecal calprotectin (FC) testing as an option in adults with lower gastrointestinal symptoms for whom specialist investigations are being considered, if cancer is not suspected and it is used to support a diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) or irritable bowel syndrome. York Hospital and Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group have developed an evidence-based care pathway to support this recommendation for use in primary care. It incorporates a higher FC cut-off value, a 'traffic light' system for risk and a clinical management pathway. ⋯ A care pathway for the use of FC that incorporates a higher cut-off value, a 'traffic light' system for risk and supports clinical decision making can be achieved safely and effectively. It maintains the balance between a high NPV and an acceptable PPV. A modified care pathway for the use of FC in primary care is proposed.
-
Prim Health Care Res Dev · Sep 2015
Multicenter StudyThe assessment and treatment of back and neck pain: an initial investigation in a primary care practice-based research network.
The purpose of this study was to conduct an exploratory examination of the current state of non-malignant acute and chronic back and neck pain assessment and management among primary care providers in a multi-site, practice-based research network. ⋯ Over a two-week period, 24 practitioners in a multi-site practice-based research network completed 196 data cards about 39 patients experiencing acute back and neck pain and 157 patients suffering from chronic back and neck pain. Findings There were significant differences between the patients experiencing acute and chronic pain in regards to practitioner evaluation, current medication management and current treatment for depression. In addition, diagnostics differed between patients experiencing acute versus chronic back and neck pain. Further, primary care providers' review of online drug monitoring program reports during the current visit was associated with current medication management using short term opioids, long-term opioids or tramadol. Most research examining acute and chronic pain focuses on the low back. Additional research needs to be conducted to explore and compare acute and chronic pain across the whole spine.
-
Prim Health Care Res Dev · Sep 2015
Medication decision making and patient outcomes in GP, nurse and pharmacist prescriber consultations.
Aim The aims of this study were twofold: (a) to explore whether specific components of shared decision making were present in consultations involving nurse prescribers (NPs), pharmacist prescribers (PPs) and general practitioners (GPs) and (b) to relate these to self-reported patient outcomes including satisfaction, adherence and patient perceptions of practitioner empathy. ⋯ Analysis of audio-recordings of consultations in primary care in South England between patients and GPs, NPs and PPs. Analysis of patient questionnaires completed post consultation. Findings A total of 532 consultations were audio-recorded with 20 GPs, 19 NPs and 12 PPs. Prescribing decisions occurred in 421 (79%). Patients were given treatment options in 21% (102/482) of decisions, the prescriber elicited the patient's treatment preference in 18% (88/482) and the patient expressed a treatment preference in 24% (118/482) of decisions. PPs were more likely to ask for the patient's preference about their treatment regimen (χ 2=6.6, P=0.036, Cramer's V=0.12) than either NPs or GPs. Of the 275 patient questionnaires, 192(70%) could be matched with a prescribing decision. NP patients had higher satisfaction levels than patients of GPs or PPs. More time describing treatment options was associated with increased satisfaction, adherence and greater perceived practitioner empathy. While defining, measuring and enabling the process of shared decision making remains challenging, it may have patient benefit.
-
Prim Health Care Res Dev · May 2015
ReviewPrimary care-led commissioning and public involvement in the English National Health Service. Lessons from the past.
Patient and Public involvement (PPI) in health care occupies a central place in Western democracies. In England, this theme has been continuously prominent since the introduction of market reforms in the early 1990s. The health care reforms implemented by the current Coalition Government are making primary care practitioners the main commissioners of health care services in the National Health Service, and a duty is placed on them to involve the public in commissioning decisions and strategies. Since implementation of PPI initiatives in primary care commissioning is not new, we asked how likely it is that the new reforms will make a difference. We scanned the main literature related to primary care-led commissioning and found little evidence of effective PPI thus far. We suggest that unless the scope and intended objectives of PPI are clarified and appropriate resources are devoted to it, PPI will continue to remain empty rhetoric and box ticking. ⋯ 1. PPI in commissioning has been constantly encouraged by policy makers in England. 2. Research shows limited evidence of effective methods and outcomes so far. 3. Constant reconfiguration of health care structures has had a negative impact on PPI. 4. The new structures look hardly better poised to bring about effective public and patient involvement.